Jesus offside goal vs West Ham - Explanation in the Mail

MCFC1993

Moderator
Joined
5 Dec 2008
Messages
31,932


An explanation in the Mail of how that decision come about and the huge problem with it, now they've had time to look into it.

Basically the final point of contact from Silva to Sterling was lost. They had a frame when Silva was playing the ball with Sterling over 10cm's onside and they used the frame where the ball had already gone where he was 2.5cm offside. Losing the point where it was actually played.

In the 0.02 seconds between frames Sterling had moved around 13cm's.

So they're not even using sufficient enough equipment to make these calls.
 
Last edited:


An explanation in the Mail of how that decision come about and the huge problem with it, now they've had time to look into it.

Basically the final point of contact from Silva to Sterling was lost. They had a frame when Silva was playing the ball with Sterling over 10cm onside and they used the frame where the ball had already gone where he was 2.5cm offside. Losing the point where it was actually played.

So they're not even using sufficient enough equipment to make these calls.

It is a more formal explanation of exactly what many of us had been arguing in the VAR thread regarding the call: insufficient transparency, incompetent use, technology not up to required standard, acting without regard to margin of error for the system as a whole.
 
Said this at the time - it is impossible to get the instantaneous point.

The laws have it down as the 'moment' which could be 0.2 seconds, and a player runs at 9 metres per second.
 
To be fair Andy Gray came up with the same conclusion a week ago on that Bein Sports programme him and Richard Keys do over in the Middle East somewhere (I cant remember exactly which Country it is broadcast from so please excuse the broad generalisation of a region). I'm sure it will be floating around on the internet somewhere but he showed exactly this point and compared to the Sterling goal that was given.
 
Andy Gray demonstrated perfectly how shit it is by taking the still back two frames, which makes Raheem onside... It's still open to human error... Just time delayed!
 
Like I said on the other thread, they should draw thick lines to allow for the margin of error and if the lines overlap at all the advantage should be given to the attacking side. The thickness of the lines could be related to the speed of the players if they have the tech to do it or just make them a standard thickness to cover most cases.
 
It is a more formal explanation of exactly what many of us had been arguing in the VAR thread regarding the call: insufficient transparency, incompetent use, technology not up to required standard, acting without regard to margin of error for the system as a whole.

You would think they would use simple statistics and calculate a 95% confidence interval to cover the margin of error, but that requires work.
 
Microchip in ball,
Microchip in all players boots.
Determine the exact position of Forward / Defender at the exact time the ball has been played.
No need for these silly lines.

I design ‘chips’ for a living and it’s not that simple.

The problem is that to accurately determine a 3D spatial position it can only be done optically as there isn’t a precise enough positioning technology available currently. GPS is not precise enough.

It is possible that in the future other radio based triangulation systems could be developed but nothing exists currently that has the required precision.

So optical is the only way at the moment which leads to the follow up problem that because time is a factor the measurement needed is actually 4D. Current broadcast video is 25 frames per second which means that there is uncertainty of 1/25 sec between frames. Clearly that time period is significant when people are using the system to accuracies of a few mm’s.

The system is fundamentally flawed until replaced by high resolution video systems which operate at higher fps. 60 Frames per second is available and used in industrial optical inspection systems and could be deployed in VAR if high speed networks were available. It’s still not perfect but higher FPS translates to more accurate position resolution.

VAR needs 60 FPS video connected to a facility within the ground via high speed direct fibre connections. This could easily be implemented using a facility similar to the post production trucks used by the TV broadcasters, these are the lorries that we see parked up outside the ground.

The tech could be easily implemented but they have chosen the cheap option of using the standard TV feeds and a central facility.

However, good a system is however, let’s be in no doubt that it would be used to fuck us over at every opportunity.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.